Creation vs Evolution

[MichaelCadry]

You'd think that the work of an omnipotent omniscient infallible god whose text we are (according to creationists) meant to trust to the level of it being a scientific textbook of creation would be better written.

You guys are arguing here so fervently apparently because the writer was imprecise with his writing. No matter who is "right". Doesn't instil much "faith" in the rest of us that this is the work of a god let alone an omniscient infallible one.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Dear Tyrathca,

Just because there is a little question about whether to eat meat doesn't mean that Our God is lacking in anything whatsoever. It is only man's interpretation of it that is screwy. Yes, we are given by God to eat meat. In Gen. 9:3, God gives man meat to eat, from the animals. But God says don't eat a creature while it is still alive. You must drain the blood first from the meat that you eat. No duck blood soup!! You don't eat blood. We're not Dracula.

Wow Ty, it's been awhile now since we've chatted. I do hope that ALL is going WELL with YOU!! It's nice to chat again. And don't forget, Our God is Omnipresent and Omnipotent!! He doesn't lack anything. He created everything though. Just so you know.

I miss Alwight. I just stopped getting emails from him. I know it means he has no access to a computer, or he's in a nursing home, or he has passed away. He had colon cancer. A real bummer!! I sure wish he was still around.

Well, you take care and Have a Good Day!!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

We can't be held hostage to every whim of Michael, who gets frustrated every other week and closes his thread - this thread will never be closed - feel free to post about creation or evolution

Dear patrick jane,

I didn't hold anyone hostage, PJ. I only closed my thread 2 times in it's history of 3 years. Not every other week. You shouldn't be so hard on me. I have tried hard with my old Creation thread. It was not so easy reading everyone's posts and replying to them. It took a long time, but I had to read every post to know what was going on in the thread. Anyway, please forgive me for closing it down. It wasn't a whim and I'm very glad that I did it. Now it's your puppy!!

God Be With You On This Thread,

Michael

 

[6days]

You'd think that the work of an omnipotent omniscient infallible god whose text we are (according to creationists) meant to trust to the level of it being a scientific textbook of creation would be better written.
You guys are arguing here so fervently apparently because the writer was imprecise with his writing.
No matter who is "right". Doesn't instil much "faith" in the rest of us that this is the work of a god let alone an omniscient infallible one.

And yet you seem so gullible when it comes to opposing opinions about origins of life....origins of the universe....origins of species....origins of sex....origins of language. etc
God's Word provides the most logical and scientific explanation.... "In the beginning, God created..."

 

[Tyrathca]

And yet you seem so gullible when it comes to opposing opinions about origins of life....origins of the universe....origins of species....origins of sex....origins of language. etc

No I understand the scientific method. Besides no scientist is claiming infallible knowledge of those things SO your comparison is unwarranted.

God's Word provides the most logical and scientific explanation.... "In the beginning, God created..."

Thats not a scientific explanation. Unless you've come up with some testable predictions I've missed? Otherwise it's just a story (a bit like string theory so far)

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Tyrathca]

Dear Tyrathca,

Just because there is a little question about whether to eat meat doesn't mean that Our God is lacking in anything whatsoever.

sure it does, if your god only stuffs up once thats enough to disprove infalibity. To me this looks like your god iswriting so poorly as to be easily misunderstood. I expect more of humans So why not gods?

But God says don't eat a creature while it is still alive. You must drain the blood first from the meat that you eat. No duck blood soup!! You don't eat blood. We're not Dracula.

So god says eat Halal (that's what Halal food is, ritual drainage of blood among other things). Do you make sure you source your meat from butchers that drain the blood first?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[patrick jane]

Dear patrick jane,

I didn't hold anyone hostage, PJ. I only closed my thread 2 times in it's history of 3 years. Not every other week. You shouldn't be so hard on me. I have tried hard with my old Creation thread. It was not so easy reading everyone's posts and replying to them. It took a long time, but I had to read every post to know what was going on in the thread. Anyway, please forgive me for closing it down. It wasn't a whim and I'm very glad that I did it. Now it's your puppy!!

God Be With You On This Thread,

Michael

I'm sorry Michael, I just didn't like to see a good thread closed. Nobody says you must read every post and respond to everything. I think you worked really hard on your thread and put undue pressure on yourself. You have closed it more than 2 times, Michael.

 

[6days]

Thats not a scientific explanation. Unless you've come up with some testable predictions I've missed?*

Yes... you missed the most logical and scientific explanations.
LOGIC... AND SCIENTIFIC
* The universe had a beginning. Science shows anything which begins to exist *has a cause. The cause, even with infinte regression, must be uncaused. The Bible tells us who that uncaused cause is. Atheism has no answer.
* The universe according to many physicists appears designed. It is a logical conclusion used in forensic science that when something appears designed...there likely is a designer.
* Every code known to mankind containing specified complex information has a code maker. Our DNA is the most complex sophisticated code in existence, even containing self repair mechanisms. Bill Gates who understanda codes says "DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created."*
Evidence of a Creator.

We can keep going Tyrathca pointing out how unscientific evolutionist beliefs are our origins. And wr can keep going on the most logical explanation...and, the most scientific explanation of origins is...'In the beginning, God created..."

 

[Tyrathca]

Yes... you missed the most logical and scientific explanations.
LOGIC... AND SCIENTIFIC
* The universe had a beginning. Science shows anything which begins to exist

Wow what a prediction... 2 options, beginning or no beginning and creationists guess the right one (probably). Not very specific and about as good as tossing a coin though.... *slow clap*

*has a cause. The cause, even with infinte regression, must be uncaused. The Bible tells us who that uncaused cause is. Atheism has no answer.

Thats a statement not a prediction. If something isn't am infinite regression (Or a causal loop) by definition it had an uncaused cause. Then just saying it was god is neither scientific or logical, it's merely a statement.

* The universe according to many physicists appears designed. It is a logical conclusion used in forensic science that when something appears designed...there likely is a designer.

Again not a prediction because it's vague and unfalsifiable. Besides "appears designed" and some weasel words of some physicists agreeing is not a test or prediction about the universe, it's at best a test about human psychology. Unless there is some clear definition of design and how to test for it that I'm not aware of?

Not scientific. Not logical. Just statements of opinion (and strangely only opinions of physicists that agree with you count. ... nice)

* Every code known to mankind containing specified complex information has a code maker.

Not a prediction. Again a statement and an illogical one at that, it's a logical fallacy of begging the question.

Our DNA is the most complex sophisticated code in existence, even containing self repair mechanisms. Bill Gates who understanda codes says "DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created."*

Again just a statement. No prediction here, you're just assuming your conclusion.

We can keep going Tyrathca pointing out how unscientific evolutionist beliefs are our origins.

We could but that would rewire talking about things which are claimed to be known without testable predictions. Not whether you dotage with whether the rest showed what was thought or you feel you have a better explanation. As you repeatedly show, even in this post, you don't actually understand what science even is.

And wr can keep going on the most logical explanation...and, the most scientific explanation of origins is...'In the beginning, God created..."

Again if it is scientific then where are the predictions? You know the specific testable ones made before the answer is known that the entirety of the rest of science adheres to. Surely you aren't asking anyone to be lenient on creationism?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Rosenritter]

You'd think that the work of an omnipotent omniscient infallible god whose text we are (according to creationists) meant to trust to the level of it being a scientific textbook of creation would be better written.

You guys are arguing here so fervently apparently because the writer was imprecise with his writing. No matter who is "right". Doesn't instil much "faith" in the rest of us that this is the work of a god let alone an omniscient infallible one.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Written for whose benefit? and what purpose? You wouldn't have any idea what to do with the detail God uses to create matter ex nihlo, you couldn't comprehend the full function of a single cell, let alone the human genome, or the genetics behind all living things. You'd have a bookshelf the size of a continent and you'd never read a speck of it in your entire lifetime. Stop talking smack.

 

[MichaelCadry]

CHECK THIS OUT!!


New Revelations from Bible
Lands Museum Exhibit



Dear Michael,

Why is a museum exhibit opening significant to both modern Jews and the worldwide Jewish diaspora?

Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem calls their new exhibit "In the Valley of David and Goliath," and it invites visitors to go back in history to the time of Israel's greatest King.

The exhibit opened to highlight 3,000 year-old artifacts from Khirbet Qeiyafa, which could be a biblically significant city mentioned in the story of the battle of David and Goliath.

One thing is for sure, these priceless finds affirm the existence of a Davidic city in the 11th Century BC.

The Elah Valley, where this particular historical dig resides, once divided the lands of the Israelites and the Philistines. Two inscriptions discovered there became instantly significant. They are written in the Canaanite script on a jar and a pottery fragment, and they may be the earliest known example of Hebrew writing.

The centimeter-high script retains some of the pictographic elements of the earliest Hebrew writing — the aleph has the horns of a bull, the bet looks like a house, and the ayin a staring eye. As recently as five years ago, there were no known Judean inscriptions from the period associated with King David; now there are four, including those of this ancient city.

What researchers found at the site is perhaps only equaled by what they did NOT find. The absence of cultic icons and shrines is evidence that the inhabitants observed a ban on graven images—very different from the idolatrous practices of the surrounding Philistine culture.

Carbon dating of cooked olives revealed the city was occupied during the time when David would have fought the giant Goliath, and the location of the city certainly supports what is written in the Bible.

Once again we see exciting historical evidence coming together to echo the history of the Jewish people, the relevancy of the Bible, and the origins of our writing. As this ministry continues to hold up the Bible as a historical narrative for Jews everywhere and the true testament of Yeshua, it is discoveries like this that prove to the world that the Bible can be trusted.

Thankful for you my friend and partner in ministry,

Jonathan Bernis
Jewish Voice Ministries International

 

[Rosenritter]

sure it does, if your god only stuffs up once thats enough to disprove infalibity. To me this looks like your god iswriting so poorly as to be easily misunderstood. I expect more of humans So why not gods?

So god says eat Halal (that's what Halal food is, ritual drainage of blood among other things). Do you make sure you source your meat from butchers that drain the blood first?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

It doesn't have to be ritualistic, the point is that there is a symbolism involved. The symbolism is rather obvious, I would think, but I'd be willing to wager there's at least one person reading this board right now that "doesn't get it."

 

[MichaelCadry]

sure it does, if your god only stuffs up once thats enough to disprove infalibity. To me this looks like your god iswriting so poorly as to be easily misunderstood. I expect more of humans So why not gods?

So god says eat Halal (that's what Halal food is, ritual drainage of blood among other things). Do you make sure you source your meat from butchers that drain the blood first?

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Dear Ty,

Almost anything can be misinterpreted at one time or the other. By the way, I sure do!! No blood for me!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear patrick jane,

No, just 2 times. It doesn't matter. I'm glad I am free from it. I did put undue stress on myself. But if you want me to resume my Creation thread, just let me know. I believe one of the mods would help me out.

Praise God!!

Michael

 

[patrick jane]

Dear patrick jane,

No, just 2 times. It doesn't matter. I'm glad I am free from it. I did put undue stress on myself. But if you want me to resume my Creation thread, just let me know. I believe one of the mods would help me out.

Praise God!!

Michael

Yes, I'm glad you decided to open your thread again. I will allow any conversations started here to finish up. To all, try to move the your conversations to Michael's thread, I contacted Michael and encouraged him to open his thread again and he agreed, so this thread will probably close.

 

[jamie]

I've never posted to Michael's thread. It's too long.

 

[patrick jane]

I've never posted to Michael's thread. It's too long.

I'll keep this open for a bit -

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear Jamie,

I'm sorry that you think my thread is too long. It just happened. Don't let that hamper you, I hope!

Praise The Lord!!

Michael

 

[Tyrathca]

I'll open this to the floor. Have creationists made any specific and falsifiable predictions which later turned out to be true? There are entire journals filled with this for evolution and this is the gold standard that anything must pass before even being considered for calling scientific.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[6days]

I'll open this to the floor. Have creationists made any specific and falsifiable predictions which later turned out to be true?

Yes...of course. Dumb question.
Example...
http://kgov.com/list-of-creation-science-predictions

There are entire journals filled with this for evolution and this is the gold standard that anything must pass before even being considered for calling scientific.

Evolution?? Or, common ancestry?? You use ambiguous words trying to sell your belief system. If you mean predictions like similar gene perform similar functions in different organisms, then you are talking about expectations that both evolutionists and creationists have.

Also... If you think predictions are the currency of evolutionism, would you agree that a history of colossal failed predictions of the Big Bang and Darwinism nullifies the belief?

 

[patrick jane]

Michael Cadry's Creation vs Evolution thread is back open - please move all conversations over there now, Thank you. This thread will now be closed unless the other one closes again -